Youda

So, are they some sort of API for the game developers? Like OpenGL and DirectX? Or what exactly they are that the applications need them? Well Steam itself might have neglible impact, but what about the SteamVR and WMR running at the same time while the game is running? Isn't that going to cause performance issues?

Hi, i've just unpacked and connected my HP Reverb G2 headset and now i'm searching how to make it working with DCS, but i'm getting super confused about all that related software. I just saw a youtube tutorial that instructed me to install "Windows Mixed Reality Portal", "Steam", "SteamVR" and "Windows Mixed Reality Portal for SteamVR", wtf? I have a stand-alone installation of DCS, it's neither installed via Steam, nor via Windows Store. I'm trying to keep my computer as bloat-free as possible and avoid all programs and platforms i don't need and now they want me to install all of this just to use a VR headset in DCS. Can someone please help me understand, why do i need this Steam's portal, Microsoft's portal and even their interconnection, and why can't DCS just use the VR directly?

Hmm, ok. But what if i play DCS as standalone app outside of Steam? Is it possible to use SteamVR to play standalone DCS?

So i just unpacked and setup my new HP Reverb G2, and tried it briefly in few of my games, and now comes the boring part and that is optimizing graphical settings for acceptable FPS without loosing all the image quality. The first thing i've been wondering about, do VR headsets have something like FreeSync to handle the case when GPU is not able to deliver that much frames per second the headset is expecting? What happens, when my headset is set to 90 Hz refresh rate, but the GPU can produce only 80 FPS? Will it tear the image in half? Second thing is about VSync. I've noticed that no matter how much i lower the details, the FPS indicator stops at 90 and never goes higher, even though the VSync in my game settings is Off. Does that mean the headset enforces VSync for itself and it will always be on? How do i know when to stop lowering details, because GPU is already keeping up with the 90 Hz, and before i drop to the absolute bottom ugliest graphics?

Same here. I thought the TWS is broken. Thanks for confirming that it's just a wrong symbology.

Happens to me almost every time few minutes after i connect to any multiplayer server. I have Radeon 5700 XT.

@QuiGon I had to check the defaults because i never use default settings. They are currently set as follows Chat show/hide - LCTRL+LSHIFT+Y Multiplayer chat All - Tab Multiplayer chat Allies - LCTRL+Tab Multiplayer chat read/write all - LSHIFT+Tab So it seems it works as you describe and the default keybinding kinda makes sense, but the naming of the key actions is nonsensical.

Yesterday i wanted to try multiplayer for the first time, but i got stuck right at the most trivial thing - how to open the chat and write something. I had to spend several minutes trying the different chat keys, trying to figure out what the hell is happening because the name of the key bings very confusing. In the control settings there are 4 entries related to chat Chat show/hide Multiplayer chat All Multiplayer chat Allies Multiplayer chat read/write all but almost none of them do what one would expect. The "Chat show/hide" key does nothing at all, or at least i haven't noticed anything. The "Multiplayer chat All" actually shows and hides the chat in read-only mode, something i would expect from the first key. The "Multiplayer chat Allies" is the only that does what it says and that is it opens the chat windows for writing and set the mode to Allies. And the "Multiplayer chat read/write all" then does what i would expect from the second key and that is it opens the chat for writing with mode set to All. Is this a bug or i have a fundamental misunderstanding of what the names mean?

Aaah, that's the problem. I had easy communications off and didn't notice. The specific microphone buttons for each plane do show the comm menu.

Ok, i thought this is game-wide problem but apparently it is aircraft-specific. From what i own, the bug is present in F-5E F-86 F-18 L-39 Mig-15 TF-51 but is not present in F-14 F-16 All Flaming Cliffs planes Su-25

With some of the recent updates the Communications menu button stopped working when i'm airborne. It works well on the ground but as soon as i take off it stops working. I even tried to open the menu on the runway right before taking off, but when i lifted off from the ground it disappeared and could no longer be opened. Is this a bug? If not, how do i now communicate with the tower or AWACS?

Hello. I'm learning the F-5E. I finished all the default missions that come with it and i start feeling pretty confident in the air-to-air combat, so i'm looking for an opportunity to start flying in multiplayer. I'm searching for a server suitable for beginners, with not too much hardcore rules and settings. A server where they will not be angry at me if i mess up. A server, where i can join any time of the day, take off, get shot down a few times and leave without ruining anyone's precisely planned team play. Do you have any suggestions?

Unfortunatelly this seems to be a standard in this industry. Some time ago i reported a bug regarding F9F-8 Cougar in War Thunder. It was closed with anwer that my claims are unfounded and i'm wrong. 2 years later it was sudenly fixed and rather without even mentioning it in the change log.

No, it doesn't. If you have a GPU from NVidia you already have ShadowPlay installed, if you have AMD you have ReLive. In both cases all it takes is 1. shortcut + Start Recording, shortcut + Stop Recording 2. drag&drop to youtube window 3. paste link here No editing is needed. Example: Simple, but does it's job. Everyone understands what the author meant. No cuts, no text and no drawings are necesary. In the end, you don't even need a video. Simple TacView or a game track is enough, and those are created automatically with no effort whatsoever. You come here automatically asuming that i'm a beginner who doesn't know the basic tactics of dogfighting, who doesn't know what boom&zoom is, and who only knows to pull stick fully aft. Why? I may be relatively new to DCS (less than 1 year of experience) but i'm definitely not new to flight simulators (over 20 years of experience). Your attempt at teaching me what energy fighting is and how to correctly rate an enemy is completely missplaces and a proof that it's you who misses the point. Of course i understand perfectly what you're trying to say, and i know perfectly all the tatics you think i need to be taught first. But if you read a little backwards i explained you why i think you are still wrong. 1. Boom&zoom was invented in WWII and the reason it worked so well was because those planes were slow to climb, so once you got an altitude you had a big advantage because the enemy couldn't follow you up. This is no longer the case. If you take a Hornet and pull straight up into complete vertical while doing just 200 knots, you will still gain 12000 ft before finally stalling. 2. Gunsights are so accurate that killing a plane from 1 mile becomes possible. So the amount of energy advantage you need to have to successfully perform a rope&dope while staying outside of gun range is so high that and the TWR difference between F-16 and F-18 so low that you will never get it using normal means. 3. All it takes is one Fox-2 (and it does not even have to be the modern all-aspect one, the Vietnam-era rear-aspect one is enough) and you can throw this tactic out of the window. F-16 was designed in an era where missiles already existed. It does not make sense to teach and practice the old WWII tactics. This is not Bf-109 vs Spitfire. Things that worked back than don't work anymore. Ok, i hoped i don't need to define basic commonly used terms, but apparently i have to. "evenly matched" does not mean to have all flight characteristics absolutely equal. It means that advantages and disadvantages are in balance, which means if 2 equally skilled pilots get to fight against each other, both have equal chances of winning if they play their jets correctly to their advantages. This does not happen in the F-18 vs F-16 matchup, because the Hornet wins in both instantaneous and sustained turn rate and the climbing advantage of the F-16 is not big enough to counter those advantages. That's what this all thread is about and what you should finally understand and stop strawmaning. No, that's a strawman. I explained you why other tactics won't work either. Currently the only reason to fly the F-16 is if you want a challange and you voluntarily want to put yourself at a disadvantage. If your goal is to win, which the tournaments are usually about, there is no reason to pick the F-16. Again, explain to me why most of the people in Folds of Honor this year chose the F-18 including the finalists. Ask the winner of the tournament why he flew all the rounds with F-18, he had to have a very good reason to. Are you really that confident with your skills and knowledge to assert that you know better than the winner of the tournament and his decision was wrong? If you admit that you might not be as good as him, doesn't his choice prove the superiority of the Hornet for the high-skill-level competitions? So the guy performed the exact tactic you're talking about, died anyway. And you insist it supports your argument?!? How about you show an example where it ends well, and the Hornet pilot isn't a potato who voluntarily dumps all his energy? The truth is, the Hornet pilot can only be defeated if he flies his plane poorly. That's what i'm saying.

If you are not willing to record a dogfight where you win by using your tactic, why are you willing to keep arguing about it? If it's a waste of time to make one simple recording from a game, how is it not waste of time writing these long answers? If you don't care what others think, why don't you just quit arguing and leave. Are you serious? So the fact that the Hornet was flown badly does not mean anything to the validity of the video to this argument?? I managed to kill a Sabre in a P-36 because he insisted on a low speed knife-fight, so according to your own logic this proves these 2 planes are evenly matched and correctly flown P-36 can always defeat a F-86. Really?? "aren't invincible" does not equal to "are evenly matched". I have never said, neither did anyone else here, that Hornet is unbeatable. My statement was supposed to be that with 2 equally skilled pilots both playing their jets well, the one flying Hornet will win more than 50% of time. And i saw nothing from you which would disprove this. All your arguments are basically strawman, because their tring to defeat a claim a Hornet is invincible which i did not say. And this is exactly the point where you are wrong. In these jets, wing design and resulting induced drag plays bigger role than T/W. It is easily possible and we can see that on many planes (currently including the F-16) that a plane with higher T/W bleeds speed faster in a turn, which means the T/W is basically only useful for straight line acceleration or straight line climbing, and any kind of maneuvering is in the Hornet's favor. The fact that F-16 bleeds more speed in turn than F-18 in DCS was independently proven by many people on this forum including myself. It's much more likely that you will be forced by him to dodge a shot, because he will almost certainly get you in his gunsight first, which makes your (F-16) situation even worse. And if you like to use dogfighting videos as a reference for comparing plane's capabilities, i suggest you to take a look at this channel https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCrqR2OL_jAYNm2suQaPM5cQ There is plenty of F-18 vs F-16 study material, where in most cases it does not end well for the F-16. Probably most notably here, where the F-16 tries to energy fight like you say it should but instead it just gets sniped from below

Because then it's easier to compare performance of US and Russian planes. And European physical units are of course superior to Imperial ones

USA uses different number format , is used to divide triples of digits, and . to divide whole numbers from decimal part. He probably reads it as 17845 seconds.

I've re-read this thread from beginning and this really strikes me. So first you claim existence of a mighty energy-fighting tactic that makes the Viper win everytime (without demonstration of course because <excuses>), bulding up an image that we are all noobz with not enough knowledge while you are the only one here who knows something more - I almost trusted you on that one. And then you come back and post a video where the Hornet is very clearly defeated by his own mistakes and claim that to be a proof of Viper being superior. So must be either bluffing and not as knowledgeable as you pretent to be, or you are utterly biased in your thinking and not able to see the truth.

At the end of the video there is a TacView which clearly shows the Viper was maintaining his corner speed much better than the Hornet. It was a skill that detemined the result, not the performance. That's why fights like this don't prove anything.

Hornet can still outrate a Viper even without paddle switch, it's just little harder because you have to more carefully manage your speed and don't let it go above ~420 knots.

"Oh look, there is one fight on youtube where F-18 is defeated by an F-16. That proves both aircrafts are equal capable". Ehmm... no.

No, and no. This is not a "plane A is better then plane B" type of thread. This is "plane A outperforms plane B in one specific characteristic" thread. Using random video of random people doing generic BFM combat proves exactly nothing. There are too many variables (including skill) that affect the result of the engagement that prevents it being used as a valid test of any flight characteristic.

o_O Can you please share it? Ideally with instructions how to use it?

Be glad the switch increases the permited G load only to about 9. In F-14 you can still turn 17 Gs In F-15 12.

Btw, this is what happens to you when you think you have enough energy advantage over the Hornet.